An Open Letter To “Flat Earthers”

I am not here today in an attempt to debate on the subject of this post, and I’m not here to declare what “shape” the earth is. The most honest answer is invariable always that one which best describes one’s best disposition, which is that I simply don’t know. I cannot know. I have no vantage point to utter such a confident declaration and build a faith-based counter-cultural movement around it. I would never claim to know without seeing for myself, which I cannot.

This is, by the way, a great example of where the Trivium method (grammar, logic, rhetoric) works wonders. The trick with applying the Trivium method is to know when it is applicable and when it is not. The Truth, when told, needs not the Trivium to show it to be Truth. Only the lie, no matter how well-intentioned or ill-conceived it stands, can be defeated by the Trivium. For more on this method of distinction, this bullshit meter, visit:

On that note, the group mentality shared between those styling themselves as “flat-earthers” has become wholeheartedly the opposite of honesty, which is to blindly state that the earth must be and therefore is indeed flat, while providing absolutely non-corelative “facts” to prove it. Though the word “flat” is wholly undefined and without any actual primary evidence whatsoever, this model of the flat earth has the same amount of primary photographs as the apparent globe model has, which is absolutely zero. Yet somehow this lack of somehow real photographicevidence (an oxymoron on its surface) only applies to what “flat-earthers” now call insultingly as “round-earthers,” a reference to how foolish everyone must be for not believing in the undefined and totally unproven in every way “flat” planet model. And so immediately and without trying, we utterly crush one of the mainstay arguments for a flat earth, which is that there is no Real picture or image of it — the same reason used to anecdotally disprove a round earth. But we must recognize and respect the maxims of law and science here, which is to say that one cannot prove a negative. In other words, a lack of evidence is not somehow positive evidence of a fact. Within the artistry and either purposeful or accidental irrationality of perfecting the use of logical fallacy, we find here that it is seemingly perfectly logical to utilize a self-damning argument (lack of photo evidence) against that which one wishes to disprove.

But the arrogant demands for real photos of the planet continue from these flat-earthers, who believe that the lack of (negative) photo evidence is positively proof that they are hiding flatness from us all.

When logic comes before or even absent of any grammar, you end up sounding like this guy:

This “flat-earther” will be our study case today.

Now, I don’t wish to talk down to or disparage this man, only to show that the fallaciously ill-conceived and unfounded confidence in what he is stating as “proof” is without anything to back it up. It is not rational, it is not scientific, and it is not reasonable. It is, however, a perfectly logical set of fallacious rhetoric. And so the intention of utilizing this video is purely to show evidence of what happens when logical fallacy becomes so out of control that it approaches the ridiculous, surpassing even religion in its vulgarity to what is self-evident Truth, simply because one’s foundation is unproven or incorrectly perceived. This arrogance of positively, rightously declared ignorance permeates throughout such stylized groups, but more so from “flat-earthers” than any other I’ve ever seen. We must ultimately call it for what it is, a strictly faith-based religious cult.

I will go point by point here, taking each topic mentioned by this self-proclaimed “flat-earther,” whatever that means, and let reason and obvious evidential proofs take their course.

Firstly, and before we even press play on the video, please take notice of the design on his shirt. This is a common model used to show an almost impenetrable, apparently highly guarded ice-wall that surrounds the entirety of the border of the flat earth. Treaties between nations are in place and the continent of Antarctica is thus off limits without international governmental permissions and permits. And this is therefore said to be a secretive conspiracy to hide the flat earth, simply because no one may thus walk to the edge of the earth and… do whatever it is one would do if one were to reach the end of the earth. Take a picture maybe? Throw a stone into space?

On the other side, the side of research and reason, we simply find this notion of an ice wall around the earth comes from the efforts of early global mappers to map a round globe onto a flat piece of paper, which is way harder than one might think. Trying to draw what is round (i.e. 3-dimensional model) onto what is a flat (i.e. 2-dimensional model) in actual simulation (representation) and scale is very difficult, of course, and involves much we need not get into here for this discussion.

Today, we have the fortunate example of computer world and background modeling to show us how such maps might appear as we warp them from round (3D) to flat (2D), though below it is opposite, going from flat (2D) to round (3D). The point is, one can easily see how Antactica would be skewed to appear to stretch around the globe if it were to be drawn on a flat map, when looking at the world from above Antarctica. In other words, what appears to be a wall of ice surrounding the oceans on all sides of the 2D map resets its original form when the map is caused to be shown in its 3D model again. The outside of the 2D map would be folded together and the continent of Antarctica would be clear. The same would be true if it was the North Pole that was the bottom of the model, if the photo was taken from the south pole. And so Antarctica is stretched out to appear as a circle around the entire map, just as illustrated below in this computer model, giving it the appearance of exactly what is pictured on our “flat-earther’s” t-shirt above.

And so this “displacement effect” upon a 2D rendered map is what a “flat-earther” tries to show as “proof” that Antarctica is a ring around our other continents on a flat surface. Again, no photo evidence, just the drawings of old mappers and mariners.

One theory is that because the flag of the “United Nations” has no pictorial image of Antarctica upon its armorial, that therefore the logical conclusion is that it’s laurels must be in actually a wall of ice spreading all around the flat earth from the south pole. But again the simplest answer is usually the correct one… For we must remember or learn the foundational fact that ANTARCTICA IS A CONTINENT and NOT A NATION. There is no independent nation in or around the geographical area known as Antarctica, which is the very reason for the afore mentioned international treaties upon it. It is wholly owned by no nation, and so it is not a party to nor is it represented in the United Nations as a nation. It is not, after all, the “United Continents.” Likewise, if all of the nations in North America dropped out of the United Nations, the flag would likely not include the continent of North America upon it. So would this lack of inclusion of a known continent somehow prove that the world is triangular, and indeed not round or flat?

A simple glance at the United Nations website gives a pretty good reason why we wouldn’t see Antarctica as well… because the very middle of the flag is a vantage point from the North Pole down!

The Design

The United Nations Emblem

The design is “a map of the world representing an azimuthal equidistant projection centred on the North Pole, inscribed in a wreath consisting of crossed conventionalized branches of the olive tree, in gold on a field of smoke-blue with all water areas in white. The projection of the map extends to 60 degrees south latitude, and includes five concentric circles” (original description of the emblem).

Gee… I hope I didn’t just create a new flat-earth meme, that because the olive laurels on the UN flag are gold, they must be keeping Antarctica all for them-selves so as to hoard all the gold! Or perhaps this is where all those pesky, greedy leprechauns go with all of their damned elusive pot’s o’ gold, riding the rainbow train to Antarctic happiness…

The point here is that even without applying science, mathematics, or any other “proofs” to the equation, we can immediately see that just reasoning, mixed with a tiny bit of due diligence, defeats this entire ridiculous theory of “the ice-wall.” Antarctica is simply not a nation. How simple and funny is that?

But I digress, for I do not know if there is an ice-wall around us. I have no way of knowing and have never been there, if it actually exists. I am only here to disprove what is said to be proofs, and have a bit of sarcastic fun along the way. More to the point though, this should scare you, that people may be lead to believe in such easily defeated nonsense. For all of us non-flat-earthers are essentially heretics worthy of death by little round balls. Ok, that’s an exaggeration, of course. But we are being metaphorically stoned by these styled “flat-earthers” convinced not only that everything is a lie, but that a different set of lies are a convincing model of everything.

As for this freezing ice shelved continent, though several nations have claimed as sovereign certain overlapping sections (sectors) of the continent to conduct scientific research, it is simply not a new or unique nation in and of itself. It has no representation therefore in the United Nations and so one would not expect to see it upon any United Nations map or flag. This is quite reasonable. You can read more about the international Antarctic treaties here:

Oh, and by the way, in case you “flat-earthers” decide to shift your focus to the north pole, let me nip that idea right in the butt. It sits over water, not any legally or internationally recognized land. So it really isn’t by law able to be considered a nation either. I hope I don’t need to remind you here that ice is also water as well, and that even a continent-sized ice cube still cannot technically be a nation either, since water is considered as a moveable in law. Look at the flag above. The North pole is portrayed as water and not continental land.

One down, so many to go…

Let’s go back to the first example video of our rather confident “flat-earther” and his fallacious rhetoric and continue with our analysis.

In the beginning monologue our “flat-earther” states that the biggest argument against “flat-earthers” such as himself is of course the fact that they have no actual evidence to back up their claims, though our flat-earth champion seems here not to apply himself to that generalization, and seeks in this video to rebuke the fact of no facts exist. He then states that this claim of lack of evidence comes from that dismissive majority of “heliocentric enthusiasts” as a title for what I assume is another way of disparaging anyone that believes the earth is round and revolves around the sun.

To be clear, I am not writing this critique as a helio-centrist or under any other religious and/or scientific titles or belief systems. Remember, I clearly stated that “I don’t know” in the beginning of this post, and that my only goal is to disprove what is labeled as “100% proof” of a flat earth, as if there is a such thing as 90% or 17.8% proof? Maybe their proof system is the same as alcohol is based on? I don’t know. One can hold many theories yet hold zero proofs. That’s religion. But the most important facet about this clandestine name-calling is the link made by this “flat-earther” that anyone who does not believe in a flat-earth model must therefore logically believe in a heliocentric model. Why? This is unclear, since the shape of the earth itself does not prove or disprove in any way that the earth revolves around the sun or is stationary. So what about geocentrism? Can I not be a believer in geocentrism and also believe in the general roundness of the planets and of Earth? Again, this is but a fallacious, false connection created to make the flat-earth model more appealing and factual by association or lack thereof, when in fact it makes no difference at all to the shape of the earth.

He goes on to state that the distance of the sun from the earth is a heliocentric model-based factoid, when in fact shape has nothing to do with any heliocentric theory or any other. But how could the shape of the earth be a correlation to the distance of the earth to the sun? Answer: It doesn’t. Whether these measurements are accurate or not, at best, fall under the knowledge category of I DON’T KNOW EXACTLY AND NEVER WILL. And yes, this is the best scientific answer possible! This is just more false-association and fallacious logic without reasonable grammar.

And here we see the immediate development of an us against them, or us against everyone else in the universe mentality, even as his rhetoric takes upon itself an almost religious quality of belief over reason, as if he is one of a new persecuted society of true believers.

The name of this video, by the way, is “The Sun Is The Smoking Gun.”

His first specific argument is that all drawings of the universe are CGI computer models.

Now, I hate to even feel the need to state this, but what the hell else is there? What else could there even be? This statement is one of those beg the question fallacies that implies that there could or should be some other kind of image of the universe showing all the planets to scale that is kept somehow secret from us. Perhaps the aliens faxed it over last century? You know, when faxes were universally cool? But where could such a “real” image come from otherwise? Wouldn’t one need to float way outside of Pluto’s course to possibly obtain such an image of the entire solar system? And would the sun not just appear from that vantage point as merely another bright star in the far distance?

Yes, all the pictures you see of the sun and planets are art or computer images. Duh! And no, they are not nor can they be to scale, because the scale would require 10’s or 100’s of miles of paper to print out. Not to mention, that while portrayed at such a scale the planets would be unseen by the naked eye, making the map pointless for study. So yes, they are drawn in and over-exagurated. Surprise! If you think that is a conspiracy to hide flat earth, I don’t even know what to say to that. How can this possibly be related to anything about flat earth? There is absolutely no correlation of the shape of the earth to the distance of each planet to the sun. This is just another completely unrelated topic used as false proof, as compared to the question: Is the earth flat?

100% dud there…

Now, standing as what has to be the most ridiculous disassociation from known science, physics, and just downright common sense and perception, our “flat-earther” shows a “proof” of something that I honestly have never heard before. At around the 2:20 mark in the video above, he actually points to the suns reflection on the clouds (atmosphere) and calls it a “hot spot.” He is actually looking at the reflection of the sun from the camera’s vantage point and thinking that the bright reflection of the sun’s light is causing a “hot spot” to form over the earth. Now at first I thought for sure this had to be a joke. But he just kept on as if absolutely this was a reasonable conclusion.

He then shows footage of the sun shining in different directions through the clouds, claiming that this means that if you follow the rays of the sun, it is really much closer to earth than is officially stated. Again, this photographic evidence is not proof in any way that the earth is flat, just more rhetoric without proper grammar and logic applied. If he’s right though, the sun would appear to be hovering in this picture to be about 2 or 3 miles above the clouds according to the way the sun rays line up. So it’s really close! Therefore… the earth is flat. LOL!

I’m sorry, but it is very hard to control my sarcasm here, so bear with me.

What he didn’t bother to check with reference to these “crepuscular rays,” which have everything to do with the point of ones linear perspective, are something called anti-crepuscular rays or anti solar rays, which actually do the opposite of these crepuscular rays he shows in his video example. Anti solar rays appear (as an illusion) to converge away from the sun instead of at the sun. Both are illusions, just like a rainbow is an optical illusion (unless you are a leprechaun). And so here again, just a tad bit of due diligence would show our “flat-earthed” theorist that his theories are quite self-debunkable.

New “flat-earther” meme: if the anti solar rays of the sun don’t point to the sun, the sun must therefore not exist. Oh, wait, that’s why they are called ANTI solar. The point is that these rays, called crepuscular rays, are also not coming directly from the sun, but from the atmospheric reproduction of them. And so no, they are not a measurement of where the sun is in the sky.

Logic without grammar…

By all means, simply type in these terms into an image finder and marvel at what comes up — a beautiful and well known phenomenon that we have all witnessed personally at some point in our lives. But to say something is well known does not make it any less of a natural or optical illusion.

And yet amazingly, arrogantly, confident and absolutely sure of himself, he continues in his false proofs as if a prophet of the sun deity…

His next point is the Earth’s supposed distance from the sun, called colloquially as the “Goldilocks” position in reference to the fairy tale of Goldilocks and the Three Bears, where the earth is just right. But of course, it is the atmosphere of the earth that is just right, not the position of it. If we loose our atmosphere by any significant degree for any reason, little Goldilocks will suddenly find herself with a really bad sunburn and won’t be feeling just right. In fact, her little face will either melt off or become a popsicle.

The correct answer to this distance measurement?

I do not know. Nor shall I. Nor am I meant to.

In answer to his irrational question then I would say no, I would not expect anything in space to be ablaze that is outside of the ring of Earth’s positional field because I would also not know its atmospheric capabilities. This mixture of scientific referential and bold-faced sci-fi conjecture is enough to cause a rational man to bleed out of his anus in angst and incurable frustration. Maybe that’s the point. The joke? However, again I would answer that I don’t know, man, because I have no idea what space is or what it’s made of, what the sun is or what it’s made of, nor what the distance is between these things. And neither do you. I cannot reasonably have unwarranted confidence in one unknown only to use that unknown to prove or disprove another unknown entity. But, according to “flat-earthers,” since apparently we cannot believe anything NASA says, why use NASA information while at the same time trying to prove NASA is a fraud?

Seriously, if we get any less rational, we are going to end up disproving the existence of fire by splashing water on it!

For the next one, I’ll just quote this dude to save time and energy…

“So why is it that here, on earth, you see- you look up and you see the sun, and the sun, always has a blue background, but when you see these official images from the trusted scientific community and the good folks over at NASA who are raking in that $52 million dollars a day, you see the sun and it’s always a black background. Why does that– why does that happen, why does it look that way. Ask– Ask these questions to yourself.”

–=–

It is perhaps this last statement that answers the rest. Why would one ask a question to one’s self? Knowing that one’s self does not already know the answer, is it really reasonable to proceed then to asking one’s self for the answer?

Essentially, he is asking, why is the sky blue?

But what about at night, when we look out in space and see 1,000’s of stars that are supposedly suns? Why isn’t space blue at night time? When the sun is behind us, instead of shining directly in our atmosphere, then we see the same darkness he is questioning. There is (apparently) no atmosphere (like ours) around the sun, and therefore there are no rays bouncing through our sky giving off a blue tint. We would need to be looking at the sun from behind an atmosphere to see the color of the atmosphere. Yet he questions why it is black behind, not in front of the sun. This is another laugh out loud moment, being but more priceless logical fallacy.

But by all means, ask your self to make sure your self knows the answer.

Again, this is simply a matter of perspective. The sky is no more blue than a rainbow is the appearance of its colors. Our perception of what we label as the color “blue” is merely the available light allowed (filtered) through our own limited capacity to see.

This children-oriented science museum in Louisiana explains it thusly:

“…One of the main factors in determining a sunset’s color is the Earth’s atmosphere. The atmosphere is made up mostly of gases as well as some other molecules and particles thrown in for good measure. The most common gasses in our atmosphere are nitrogen (78%) and oxygen (21%). The remaining single percent is made up of water vapor and lots of tiny solid particles like dust, soot & ash, pollen, and salt from the oceans. There are also trace gasses like argon present. Also, depending on where you live, you’ll have to factor in that volcanoes can put large amounts of dust particles high into the atmosphere and pollution can add different gases or dust and soot to the air as well.

The atmosphere of the Earth can be thought of like a filter on a camera lens.

Light from a light bulb or the Sun may look white, but it is actually a combination of many colors. When you see light filtered through a prism you’ll see this white light split up into its separate colors, i.e. wavelengths. White light is the colors of the spectrum blended into each other. And a rainbow that you see in the sky is actually a natural prism effect as rain drops split those different colors up. The colors have different wavelengths, frequencies, and energies. Violet has the shortest wavelength. Red has the longest wavelength. The shorter the wavelength means the more powerful the frequency.”

–=–

In other words, when this guy says to “trust your own eyes,” every scientist in the world reacts in painful spasm, since our own eyes are naturally filtered from seeing most of the spectrum of available light. Our eyes are like a filter (camera lens) for the brain, which is a beautiful gift of Nature, letting us see only what we need to see for our environment and survival in Nature.

Let’s just put it this way… if the atmosphere wasn’t there to protect your sorry ass, you wouldn’t be asking why the sky (atmosphere) is blue in the first place, now would you. Why not wonder at its glory than question its visual and functional reality?

But let us pause here yet again to ask that ever so important and repetitive question: what in the hell does the blue sky have to do with the earth being flat?

Essentially, he answers his own question by stating the fact that in space, when looking at pictures of the sun, the background black, while from earth and within its atmosphere, it is blue.

And that leads us to the logical fallacy of the day: because NASA rakes in 52 million a day it cannot be trusted. NASA draws and creates CGI pictures of what it cannot otherwise take pictures of and fills in colors to see things in its published pictures (and always discloses to us it is doing so), therefore it again cannot be trusted.

By this logic, we cannot trust graphic engineers or structural architects unless their drawings match exactly to what the final constructed building will look like, including the color scheme picked out by the eccentric billionaires that will corporately dwell therein.

Again, let me remind the reader, I am not defending anyone or anything, including NASA. Please don’t shoot the messenger. I am only disposing what is labeled as 100% proof by someone who calls, identifies, and publicly displays himself culturally as a “flat-earther.”

Moving on…

Once again, at about 8:40 into this horrifyingly laughable video, I will need to quote our “flat-earther” just to show the idiocracy of what is being stated with no sign of apology or awareness of any of the sciences.

“If you actually just trust your senses — if you, you can pop on YouTube, or you can, you know, take a look at this video and find additional videos, you’re gonna find that there are time-lapses that people have taken of the sun moving across the sky. And while the sun’s moving across the sky, you’ll notice that the Earth seems to be stationary, like, the Earth isn’t moving; the buildings that you see aren’t moving. You see the sun drifting across the sky. So wha- what does that tell you? We’re told that the Earth is rotating around the sun, yet we feel no movement, we don’t see any motion, we don’t feel any motion out here, but we feel stillness when we go outside. And, in the time-lapse you see the sun moving across the sky, just like that (hand motion). So what does that tell you? I believe that tells you to trust your senses. And what does your senses tell you? Your senses tell you that the sun is the thing that is moving and that the Earth is flat and stationary. But let’s go on…”

–=–

Firstly, I love that he says trust your senses, and in the same sentence tells us to watch YouTube. In other words, trust the CGI. Trust digital technology. Just don’t trust NASA or government or any of them there round-earthers and their usage of YouTube.

So here he actually points to the fact that when we set up a STATIONARY camera pointed at the sky, the Earth for some reason does not seem to move. The buildings stay where they are. LOL! Only the sun seems to move across the sky.

Do I need to even comment on this?

If you don’t understand, then go buy a mountable camera and perhaps jump off a cliff. Afterwords, if you survive, you can marvel at how everything but the tip of your hat seems to move, but not what the camera is mounted upon. The mountains, the buildings, the sky… everything just seems to be flying by in utter chaos! Be careful though, because that large mass of land coming straight for the camera is actually the round earth about to smack the hell out of you.

As to the motion fallacy, I can merely direct the reader of this, and any flat-earther” for that matter, to go and drive your car at 90 miles an hour down the wrong side of the highway. Once you reach that speed, you’ll notice that if you drop a quarter, it falls straight down as if you are standing still. You will also notice that you cannot actually feel the motion of traveling at 90 miles an hour, since you are not accelerating or decelerating any more. But eventually you’ll cause a crash with an oncoming car or truck, and you will definitely feel that motion. May sting a little, but at least you’ll be able to rationalize how it is we don’t feel the turn or motion of the Earth.

Now again, I don’t claim to know anything about this. Are we turning? I don’t know. Are we spinning and darting through space with reckless abandon in a spiral with the sun and other planets like crumbs in the garbage disposal of space? I don’t know.

However, I will point out again that the notion that the earth is stationary or that it is spinning or that it is rocketing through space… has nothing to do with the Earth being flat or round. So please stop equating unreliable concepts together.

Seriously, this has to be a practical joke, right?

Trust your senses. But let me tell you what your senses tell you, because I’m a “flat-earther” and everyone else is round and heliocentric.

My favorite part of this video, starting at about the 10 minutes mark or so, is the ill-conceived story and experiment he tells about calling up his friends in England and in Australia to show that sunlight is in all three places at once, and that this is somehow impossible on a globe model earth. Now, he could have just gone to the time zone websites and pulled up this information himself, to see that when he called his friends internationally they would tell him exactly what would be expected at that moment. But instead, without checking any source or even having the conscious awareness to verify his claim, he arrogantly presents a completely ridiculous “story” of how the fact that his friends can see the sun rising and setting at the same time it is directly over his head in the western state of Washington proves the earth is flat.

So I pulled up what I believe any rational man would pull up, the time zone charts based on the round earth that everyone is familiar with and for which our entire time and travel infrastructure is based on. Now I have data to compare to an anecdotal phone call that presents absolutely no proof of anything except that the sun can be seen in three places at once. To our flat-earthed, this duel phone call is proof-positive that the earth must be flat. I have no idea what this is so, except again to point out the lack of grammar that his dialectic (logic) is built upon, leaving his rhetoric completely in the realm of the absurd.

Here is the data set I found after 5 minutes of reasonable research. I looked at the sunset charts for England and Australia today (August 23, 2017) which can be found and inquired of here:

Australia (Biloela Queensland): Time was 6:17 am and the sun was at 78 degrees — Video shows 6:06 am, and sun is barely rising (not quite yet beginning to rise – to quote: “just coming up”) in that video, just as one would expect from the data set provided.

6:18 am ↑(78°)

5:43 pm ↑(282°)

–=–

England (West Yorkshire): Video shows sun already quote: “over the hill” referring to a sun already set and out of site, and that it was apparently a quote: “nice sunset.” The website shows an equal dataset, predicting the sunset to happen at 8:17 pm, with a 290 degree angle, just as one would expect immediately after sunset at 9:06 pm (time of video).

5:59 am ↑(69°)

8:17 pm ↑(290°)

–=–

Note that these degree points are referencing the upward direction as well as either east or west. In other words, the sun that is being seen at sunset in Queensland Australia is also being seen as a sunset in West Yorkshire England, just was recorded on the globe model.

Next we simply plug in where our “flat-earther” happens to be standing while conducting this hilariously this botched experiment while making it sound logically as absolute proof. He is in Tacoma Washington, at what just happens to be the exact middle off the day, or what is officially called the “solar noon.” And we see that the degree of angle shows the sun to be in the middle of the sky, at 180 degrees (the middle point between sunset and sunrise).

And so, this means that what England sees as a sunset and Australia sees as a sunrise is actually the middle of the day in the Western most United States (Pacific Time Zone). And this just happens to be exactly what the globe model predicts would happen. And yet this little “story” of our “flat-earther” calling other internationally unorganized “flat-earthers” states this to be absolute 100% proof (the name of the video) that the earth is flat.

To be clear, when we look at the “globe” model map below, we can see that in order for this to have happened, the sun would be over the State of Washington, to which the eastern shore of Australia would see this solar noon as the eastern rising morning sun, while In Western Europe, specifically in England, we would also see the sun setting in the west. This can only happen on this round earth, for on flat earth maps we see Australia being east of both America and England. So how could Australia be seeing the solar noon in America by looking east at the same time England is looking west?

We know the answer, of course. Do I actually have to say it? That the map connects to the other side of the map…

And so even more hilarious to consider while listening to this “flat-earther” preach, this little experiment actually disproves the validity of any flat earth model, since if the sun was hovering over North America, it would be seen as a westward sunrise in both Europe and Australia, and nothing from the East. In other words, the sun would rise and set only in the west in Australia according to this flat-earth model.

So what does this mean?

Between chuckles and outright bursts of uncontrollable laughter, it means that this self-proclaimed “flat-earther” just proved the exact readings one finds on sites such that NASA would run. He literally proved that the “globe” model does exactly what it says it does, and that a flat earth model does not jive with the suns placement in the skies!

But don’t be fooled by my research here… for this is actually, somehow, some way, proof that the Earth is flat, but satirically so, and only in a round sort of way.

Now at this point we must begin to speculate that this whole flat earth thing is just a very widely played joke, or that it is indeed merely just another counter-culture mind game with a goal towards total domination through controlled chaos of a completely irrational idiocracy… kinda like the movie version. Even the majority of comments left in this video ask if it is a joke, while most of the remainder of comments are insults hurled at “round-earthers” and “heliocentric enthusiasts” that offer no substance or proofs, very much like a religious argument should be.

But can we really compare the movie with today’s reality?

.

–=–

Perhaps the greatest and most appealing fallacies is the fact that when we look at the horizon, we see with our own eyes that it is flat. And so we again apply logic without grammar, and conclude that our perception must be correct. But please allow me to attempt to explain why it is that we do not see curvature on the horizons of our Earth, based on the globe model…

But how does one tell in words what would need to be experienced to comprehend? We can only try here to explain the only rational outcome of what it would be like to stand on a perfectly round (3-dimentional) ball or globe.

To start, we must realize that everywhere we look at the horizon, say if no mountains were in our way, that is forward, backward, right, left, and every point in between, would necessarily be at an equal vantage point wherever we may look. In other words, the horizon would be flat in appearance, and the curvature would not be perceptible, since every point on the horizon is at the same height from our perspective.

Remember, this is all about perspective. You’ll need to use your imagination for this one, keeping it bound to reason.

So let us pretend that while we are standing on a perfectly round globe model of anything, and therefore are standing automatically at its highest point, that we are then told to look for curvature on the horizon between the right and left points on opposite sides from one another, and then for the curvature from in back of us to the very front of our position.

Where would the perspective of such curvature begin and end, if everywhere you turned upon a perfect globe and therefore every horizontal point of the surface spread equally out in front of you? Answer: the horizon would appear flat (equidistant) because we are viewing the globe not in 3d but only two-dimensionally (length/hight).

If it started at the front and went left or right in its curvature, then there would be nothing left behind us when we turned around, since the curvature would not allow for that or any other equal point to exist, and this would actually, ironically, and mathematically prove it not to be a perfect globe. It is in fact the 2D perception of flatness that proves the actual 3D roundness. In other words, the horizon would need to curve back up in order to reach the level horizontal point behind us and on each side of us, and for that matter at every point we can see. If we saw a curve in front of us, curving left and right in a downward (fisheye) style, it would have curved in front of us to the point where nothing would be left to see when we turn around. But the point behind us is at the same horizontal plane as that which is in front, left, and right of us. So where could this supposed curve of the globe possibly manifest itself when the plane or horizon of it is equal on all sides (perspectives) from our two-dimensional vantage point? It cannot. It’s like a reverse optical illusion. And we are missing a whole dimension of perspective.

And so again we see here that the very answers to the questions posed by these self-proclaimed “flat-earthers” are actually the same answers as to why the earth is not flat. To apply one or two-dimensional logic to a three-dimensional equation will always cause confusion… and false religion.

I’m not sure what to conclude from this ridiculous collection of 100% proof of flat Earth, except that it is so unbelievable that someone could actually believe it. If anything, this “flat-earther” just proved that quite the opposite to be true. In any case, this whole counter-cultural meme and identity of false-persecution just needs to stop. To all my friends who have presented me with similar, easily refutable “evidence” of a flat Earth, I appeal to you to focus on what is Real and verifiable.

This is not dissimilar to the Mandela Effect hoax, to which I did a similar discourse on. The key to remember is that nothing in Nature, nothing in Reality is changing, only the artifice, entertainments, cartoons, timelines, and fictional histories of men. These are not Reality. And neither is the flat Earth model.

However, I end this by stating again that I don’t know. I have not proven anything here today, only debunked what others are labeling as “truth” and “proof.”

If you would like me to go over other flat earth mysteries, false positive proofs, and fallacies, please let me know. I’ll tackle them one by one in the comments below. And if I don’t know, I will say I don’t know.

To be clear, for those who hurl insults instead of reasonable comments…

I do not love NASA. I do not side with any side, because Truth only has one side, and one either knows or does not know Truth. I do not love government. I despise doctors, scientists, and any other flattering titles bestowed by this syndicalist education, diplomacy, and licensing system. I am not any label, so don’t call me one. I don’t believe in the flat earth or the round earth or the square earth or the triangular earth or the trapezoidal earth. I don’t believe in the heliocentric or the geocentric or the egocentric position of the earth. And I will give no comment space for those who declare that by default I must be any or all of the above. Only rational statements of reason are asked for here. I don’t want to be dared to research anything and I won’t be amazed by what you present. I will only research it primarily and let you know what I find, with the caveat that I do not know.

In closing, it occurs to me that this would make a great script for a video. Please feel free to do so, without need of any permissions. I’d certainly love to hear this dude’s response!

Now, please focus on what is self-evident, self-existent, as that which needs no proof to establish its already clear existence. Smell the flowers and cherish what beauty and Realness is left here for your senses to enjoy, before this scientific community genetically modifies us and our environment into the internet of all things.

…or you can come on my You tube Channel and live debate me…but you had better prepare much better than this piece of schlock/mock/ridicule piece you just posted.
Intro to Flat Earth History, Research and Conspiracy.

Come on Clint your much smarter than to one off 5,000 years of history and name call with such childish words….Sea LEVEL, AeroPLANE, PLATE tectonics, Sunrise, Sunset…heck look at the eclipse with our camera and tell me that is the Moon, WTF???

I’ll also send you my must read Flat Earth book, for free, if you ask me nicely
The Rahu Eclipse!; Proof Positive with a P900 Camera
and exactly how did they build those pyramids and why???
I’ll wait …

I’d be happy to come on your channel, though not for debate. Debate is a tactic used to create opposition, not find truth. if you’d like to discuss with respect and integrity the subject I’d be happy to do so. If you are the prophetic sayer of flat earth knowledge, then I will act as the consulate student should, questioning everything you claim by demanding proofs of claim and by applying reason to each topic.

For this I need no preparation, for I am not making any claims, remember. I claim simply not to know and therefore not to declare. Whether the earth is round or flat or it is a fractal, it will be, has been, and forever will be that shape regardless of whether I win or loose a debate, and no matter what my opinion is of it.

Just let me know if you can handle not debating, and actually speaking with respect about a subject that is in my opinion a divide and conquer tactic.

By the way, if you want to pass those off as flat earth maps, you better erase the comments and the description on the map that it is a globe.

Don’t you ever wonder why the “ice wall” looks the same on every map? Same hooks and shapes? Because when the wall is put back together it forms the continent, of course.

Here, do your homework please, we can have a much more intelligent discussion, not debate, if you do.

My background is 25 years as a research analyst on Wall St. and the past three years solidly investigating every single day for hours, a 5,000 year geocentric TheoCosmology.

Putting the movie Idiocracy with your Flat Earth piece was tacky and disrespectful to our work, in my opinion and set me off. I expect better from your quality of work.

I think you’ll find my work on the Antarctic very eye opening for you, It’s a much bigger discussion than just a one off comment about an ice wall picture all looking alike. I do my homework and was a Wall Street analyst for 24 years and have dedicated myself to researching FE 6-12 hrs per day for the past 3 years, wrote a book on it, have a website and you tube channel.

Please bone up, like i’ve gone to school with you and Walter on legal issues and have put out on video crediting you both for enlightening and educating me, like i look forward to doing with you, if your mind is like a good parachute…fully open!
The Greatest Ongoing Financial Scam in Modern History ~ The CAFR Reportshttps://www.youtube.com/edit?o=U&video_id=aSR6o6pNSzI

Elisabeth

But I stress again here that, if indeed there is some compelling evidence and if indeed you are as advanced in your studies as you say, then I would think you’d want guys like the above subject of my post here to be outed as frauds, so they don’t take away from your research. Is this not the case? Surely you cannot believe that I did a disservice by showing that everything this guy says is incorrect and actually proves the opposite? If flat earth research is indeed genuine, then surely you cannot be in support of such a charlatan as this?

I took no side, and I said nothing personal to you and your work, now did I?

Maxx

I told my two idiot flat earth friends, “if its so important, go tell the school board, where you send your children,.and you pay taxes for, that the earth is flat. I dare you. Because flat or not you are going to get a free ride to the mental ward. Please let me know when you are going to do this, because I gotta see this ” I said. Because these guys seemed so sincere and believed it, I decided to give it a shot for five days. “Dude, just show me the best video” and he says “pick anyone” So I pick Matt the guy with the 33 on his shirt. Talks like Jack Nicholson. Basically an arrogant jerk. He seem to basically insult someone into believing the flat earth. After 5 days I started feeling creepy like it was a psyop hoax. We should be able to go up a mountain in New England with a telescope and see England. Ask any flat earther how while facing east the Sun rises up to my left arcs over my head in a circular plane, goes down and sets to my right to continue this circular plane starting in the east again. Ask them how the the sun, sets and rises. Prepare to chuckle when they explain themselves.

I was just amazed that everything this particular one said was actually an argument against himself, and yet he still carried on so confidently. Thanks for the comment, and let’s hope this isn’t a plague of irrationality and untruths that spreads to everything else.

Maxx

“Flat Earth: Rocket at 73 miles shows moon, which proofs the earth is not a globe”. Hilarious because I thought this guy was serious at first BUT he was mocking the flat earthers. “Fish eye lens” LOL !!! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMp49IYBhO4

Doreen Agostino

If the Earth is infinite flat, then it is a hyperbolic system where the edges just stretch out forever. If this is true then it’s consciousness which projects the land, your observation generates more space. This then leads consciousness to being a primary function or operator of the supercomputer holographic system of the universe. Then the language of that system is next. Think about these things people, that is what the secret societies know. They ensure you fight over who gets to be ruled the next the hardest so that you never figure out the truth.

The flat earth thing is a psy-op (most likely a US (CIA) Government psy-op) and a distraction to befuddle the naive minds of some conspiracy people. The authorities LOVE to take the piss out of the people and laugh at them.

However, this should assist you, for flat earthers have no understanding of the “refraction of light” phenomena. They will tell you that a vessel sailing away from you in the distance does not disappear from view over the horizon which, in part, is true, because light BENDS (a scientifically prove fact) and follows the curvature of the earth thereby giving us an optical illusion or false vision of a flat earth.

mjday47362

Anyone who says the earth is a globe after all the reasoning and research that has taken place is simply a person who is willfully ignorant. Some people are just that way. Flat water and flat frozen lakes prove the flat earth.
I have often wondered, if the earth is spinning at 1000 miles per hour, why don’t we see the wind blowing at mach1.2 as well? If the earth is spinning that fast, how is it possible for the wind to blow in other directions? If gravity is that intense, how do butterfly’s, other insects and birds fly? Why is it I can see land masses out in the ocean that should be over a curve and way out of sight….yet right there it is, in plain sight.

Malcolm Bowden makes a mockery of your silly ideas. You then pathetically try to make an argument with bland meaningless generalities like “after all the reasoning and research.” Feel free to post a link so that I can go there and mock them. LOL

Oh and the earth is not spinning. The earth is fixed at the centre of the universe with the stars moving in the aether, so now you can run along and do some WORTHWHILE research on Geocentricism – The Truth.

Maxx

Lets say the Earth was flat – who cares ? I still have get up and plant my seeds and water them. You dont. Nothing I can do about it. SO NOT A PRESSING ISSUE. I have 3 pressing issues I believe that are of the highest priority. 1) exetrmination by jew doctors. 2) The worldwide pedophile child rape problem and 3) 911 No Planes which is so easily proveable and shows how brainwashed stupid Americans are. I use 911 to test other researchers to see if they paying attention. Honestly most dont and cant see the CGI fakery. Its pressing because being hit by 4 cruise missiles from some external force, is an act of war. FE is not. The flat earth exists in your 2 dimensional reality where reindeer fly. Flat earthers are disruptive to their families and those around them, while we have far more pressing issues . Which was the point. The Greeks knew the Earth was round thousands of years ago, by measuring shadows in different locations at the same time on the solstice. Once someone goes Flat Earth, I get rid of them. It separates the wheat from the chaff.

Let’s say there is no life after death – who cares? I do!! Either The Truth interests you or it doesn’t and you love lies like 99% of this world’s population. The earth is not flat. The earth is a fixed globe at the centre of the universe with the stars moving in the aether.

Maxx

Einstein is a fraud and plagiarized his “work” from a Frenchman. Truth is self evident. Flat earth is not self evident. When the idiotic flat earthers resort to insulting people into their position, which is all the time, its fraud. Not ONE flat earth slob can draw me a picture of this flat earth. Not one. Not one can explain how the sun sets and rises. Not one. Because it is fucking hilarious when they do. Hilarious.

mjday47362

“Earth is a realm, it is not a planet. It is not an object, therefore, it has no edge. Earth would be more easily defined as a system environment. Earth is also a machine, it is a Tesla coil. The sun and moon are powered wirelessly with the electromagnetic field (the Aether). This field also suspends the celestial spheres with electo-magnetic levitation. Electromag levitation disproves gravity because the only force you need to counter is the electromagnetic force, not gravity. The stars are attached to the FIRMAMENT.”

Maxx

Here we go with the “realm” bullshit. That’s right up their with the “firmament” holding up the stars and moon rubbish. One flat earther idiot, wasnt sure if the flat sun was 30 miles up or 3000 miles up. They dont even corroborate themselves because they all have their own fantasy land of ideas of what this mythical flat earth looks like.

Vicki

Long before I ever heard this notion of “flat-earth”/ “round-earth theories, I had begun a journey of looking into and at words, while helping out a friend with her research on a different topic. At the same time I was attempting to comprehend law and legal words. What I began to realize was many of these words are literal and figurative, and they are all synonyms for the word “jurisdiction”, with the exception of flat, but flat is merely a metaphor for map, something which exists on a flat plane, which is merely a flat representation of a globe (sphere). What are these words that are synonyms for the word “jurisdiction”?

Sphere
1. In geometry, a solid body contained under a single surface, which in every part is equally distant from a point called its center.
2. An orb or globe of the mundane system.
3. An orbicular body, or a circular figure representing the earth or apparent heavens.
4. Circuit of motion; revolution; orbit
6. Circuit of action, knowledge or influence; compass; province; employment.
7. Rank; order of society.
(Webster’s 1828)

Latin sphaera “globe, ball, celestial sphere” (Medieval Latin spera), from Greek sphaira “globe, ball, playing ball, terrestrial globe,” a word of unknown origin…Also from late 14c. as “a globe; object of spherical form, a ball,” and the geometric sense “solid figure with all points equidistant from the center.” Meaning “range of something, place or scene of activity” is first recorded c. 1600 (as in sphere of influence, 1885, originally in reference to Anglo-German colonial rivalry in Africa).
(etymology.com)

MAP, noun [Latin mappa, a cloth or towel, a Punic word.]
A representation of the surface of the earth or of any part of it, drawn on paper or other material, exhibiting the lines of latitude and longitude, and the positions of countries, kingdoms, states, mountains, rivers, etc. A map of the earth, or of a large portion of it, comprehends a representation of land and water; but a representation of a continent or any portion of land only, is properly a map and a representation of the ocean only or any portion of it, is called a chart. We say, a map of England, of France, of Europe; but a chart of the Atlantic, of the Pacific, etc.

MAP, verb transitive To draw or delineate, as the figure of any portion of land.
(Webster’s 1828)

Environment – from Environ (vt) to veer
1. To surround; to encompass; to encircle; as a plain environed with mountains.
2. To involve; to envelop
3. To besiege; as a city environed with troops.
4. To inclose; to invest.
(Webster’s 1828)

“tablecloth, signal-cloth, flag,” said by Quintilian to be of Punic origin (compare Talmudic Hebrew mappa, contraction of Mishnaic menaphah “a fluttering banner, streaming cloth”) + Latin mundi “of the world,” from mundus “universe, world” (see mundane). Commonly used 17c. in a figurative sense of “epitome; detailed representation.” To put (something) on the map “bring it to wide attention” is from 1913.
(etymology.com)

Climate from the Greek κλίμα
climate (n.) Look up climate at Dictionary.com
late 14c., “horizontal zone of the earth,” Scottish, from Old French climat “region, part of the earth,” from Latin clima (genitive climatis) “region; slope of the Earth,” from Greek klima “region, zone,” literally “an inclination, slope,” thus “slope of the Earth from equator to pole,” from a suffixed form of PIE root *klei- “to lean.”

The angle of sun on the slope of the Earth’s surface defined the zones assigned by early geographers. Early references in English, however, are in astrology works, as each of the seven (then) climates was held to be under the influence of one of the planets. Shift from “region” to “weather associated with a region” perhaps began in Middle English, certainly by c. 1600.
(etymology.com)

G2824 kilma (κλίμα)
I. an inclination, slope, declivity
II. the [supposed] sloping of the earth from the equator towards the poles, a zone
III. a tract of land, a region

1. In geography, a part of the surface of the earth, bounded by two circles parallel to the equator, and of such a breadth that the longest day in the parallel nearest the pole is half an hour longer than that nearest to the equator. The beginning of a climate is a parallel circle in which the longest day is half and hour shorter than that at the end. The climates begin at the equator, where the day is 12 hours long; and at the end of the first climate the longest day is 12 hours long, and this increase of half an hour constitutes a climate to the polar circles; from which climates are measured by the increase of a month.

2. In a popular sense, a tract of land, region or country, differing from another in the temperature of the air; or any region or country with respect to the temperature of the air, the seasons, and their peculiar qualities, without any regard to the length of the days, or to geographical position. Thus we say, a warm or cold climate; a moist or dry climate; a happy climate; a genial climate; a mountainous climate

CLIMATE, verb intransitive To dwell; to reside in a particular region.
(Webster’s 1828)

Region
noun re’jun. [Latin regio, rego.]
1. A tract of land or space of indefinite extent, usually a tract of considerable extent
2. The inhabitants of a region or district of country.
3. A part of the body; as the region of the heart or liver.
4. Place; rank.

SYS’TEM, noun [Latin systema; Gr. to set.]

1. An assemblage of things adjusted into a regular whole; or a whole plan or scheme consisting of many parts connected in such a manner as to create a chain of mutual dependencies; or a regular union of principles or parts forming one entire thing.

2. Regular method or order.

3. In music, an interval compounded or supposed to be compounded of several lesser intervals, as the fifth octave, etc. the elements of which are called diastems.
(Webster’s 1828)

“All systems are perfectly designed to get the results they get.” Peter Senge

All of these words, as well as many others like, characteristic, and condition, can be found in a thesaurus, as synonyms.

So, once I did hear of this notion of “flat vs. round earth”, it occurred to me that people were arguing over metaphor, one they were taking literally. In the end, the only conclusion I was able to arrive was this, confusion can lead people to argue over things they could answer. Let alone if they don’t know these are all words (synonyms) for ‘jurisdiction’, and the only thing I can think is that this has nothing to do with what we call the shape of the earth, if you will. But, most people don’t look at these types of connection in and with words.

Once I realized that these words are used to describe all of the different parts of a whole, for example: the education system, the climate of education, the sphere of education, a new map for education or health care, or any other, there had to be more, a bigger picture, if you will, and that made all the difference to me and in how I began looking at words in a whole new way. Because, the only thing I could look at were the words themselves and they way they were being used, that was the only thing I could come to a knowing about. Again, I was not looking into the shape of the earth topic when this occurred to me, but once I did hear of this and looked into what people were going on about, all the words, descriptions were the same or synonyms of them.

Clint – I thought this was a great blog post, as I have been attempting for a while now, to point out the same thing, just in a different way. So, I hope you don’t mind that I added it here.

Now, my friend, you are ready to read or re-read the Bible. Now you may see past the literal nonsense and grasp the metaphoric and parabolic beauty and truth, the Law. Because now you realize that words are superficial until intent is defined and understood. Your awakening was similar to mine, so thank you for sharing this.

And this is why we are all ac-climat-ized to such utter corruption, poverty, despair, and lies. We are the dwellers of hell. See etymology of dwell for a real hoot.

BMan

mjday47362

Hello Vicki, by your comment/diatribe or possibly…Rant that you posted above, I can tell that you have no Freaking clue what Flat earth is all about. By your comment, you appear to be the perfect CNN viewer who believes everything you are told by “The System”, shall we call it. Personally I call it the JEW World Order.

Is your lack of knowledge about Flat Earth due to Ignorance, Willful Ignorance, basic lack of understanding of the Subject Matter or do you just like to post something long and boring that has nothing to do with the subject at hand, which you seemed to have accomplished very well?

I am providing over 200 YouTube videos from people who have actually taken time to research and learn about Flat Earth. Unlike yourself, they appear to be at least marginally awake and with a consciousness that actually resonates with the facts of the matter at hand.

What do you think the concept of Flat Earth could possibly be about since it has been hidden by the powers that be for over 500 years now and people like you prove they have done a damn good job at what they do.

I am betting that you also believe the World Trade Towers were taken down by two jets that flew into the sides of the towers…correct? Sure you do. And all of this death and destruction had to do with bullies with beards and razor blade knives following the directions of a tyrant who lived in an Afghan cave.

I’m betting you still think that JFK was killed by Lee Harvey Oswald too…..right? Well, you would be wrong there too.

I bet you think the United States of America is the most powerful government in the world. Wrong again Vicki…you need to keep up dear.
The USA is a for profit corporation owned by the Vatican. See the Act of 1971. Just Google it or go to the library and read a real book for the first time in your life.

People like you embarrass me. People like you actually think the Eclipse of August 21, 2017 was a demonstration of the moon passing in front of the sun. So when did the moon start traveling form west to east as this moon did. LOL It wasn’t the moon but I’m sure you have no clue what it was or that there was even a question about it.

Why do I say that in confidence? Because you truly believe CNN’s every word and that the Pope is a good man and the government is there to help you. Just click your heels three times Vicki and say the magic words and all this will go away.

WTFU Vickie! EVERYTHING you have been told since your birth is a lie.

Flat Earth is all about the JEW World Order hiding the creator of all that IS and I do not mean Jesus because Jesus never existed. Oh, you still worship the invisible man huh! Sorry about your luck.

Earth does not move, spin, orbit or rotate Vicki. Earth is rock solid and immovable. The sun, moon and at least 2 dark discs rotate over our heads, under a huge dome and above the dome is water. The sun and moon are about 32 miles across and about 3000 miles over our heads.
The stars are attached to the dome and the dome spins.
There is only one pole and that is the north pole. If there was a south pole, your compass would point south when you traveled south of the equator. It is just the nature of a magnet.
The dome is a mono pole motor powered by the Ether and static electricity. Research the work of Tesla.
There is no such thing as outer space either. That is pure science fiction.
There is NOTHING in orbit. NOTHING! Nothing can orbit because there is no space.
Gravity is not a factor in anything. If it is heavy it falls, simply as that!
The Oceans are flat, there is no curve on the water so that means Flat Earth is real, no matter what kind of BS you find on Wikipedia to post so you can read what you posted.

And this is why your efforts are fruitless. You insult people with ad hominem and well-poisoning and straw man and red herring fallacies and call it fact. Vickie watches CNN? That’s the best you can do? You are stupid because you don’t believe in flat earth? It’s like trying to reason with a child. And then you insult her for not having knowledge of what flat earth is all about? Isn’t it about flat earth? If it’s about something else, why call it flat earth? Why the deception?

The worst part of this is the dogma, the insistence on correctness you have. The fact is that you have no facts. You have theories yet unproven, and for that matter mostly unprovable. So why would anyone read your insulting comment and want to even come close to your “movement?”

mjday47362

Hello Clint! Just a couple of words for you.
You may well consider shutting this blog down because you are obviously out of touch with reality. Earth is flat, it is a proven point and there is no comment after the truth of the matter.

With idiots like you as bloggers, there is no reason to have a blog in the first place. YOU need to take a stand for something, not just comment on everything and try to be the ring leader on all comments.
Why be a blogger if you have no purpose?

To me Clint, you are like a man without a penis. You really do need to fuck something and you need to do it now but so far, the only thing you have fucked is this blog!

Until you get your head out of your ass and see the light of day, you might as well go the way of the lemming!

Earth is flat, there is a huge dome over us, earth is a Realm, not a planet. The dome turns and the stars are connected to the dome outside the dome and the earth only has one pole and that is the north pole. If there was a south pole, YOUR compass would point to S after you got south of the equator. BUT since that never happens, there is no north pole.

I would go on but I see no need wasting my time on Idiots who claim to be bloggers who have never studied a day in their life. I have researched for 30 years. Your blog is pathetic Clint. Do something about it or take it off the net!
There is truth inside your head. So wake the fuck up and tell the world about it.

Case in point, now the attack is on me, the messenger but not the message. Ok. That will be the last post I allow from you here, and again only to show the vulgarity and consensus based falsity of this thing. Global warming is also a consensus based fact reached by the United Nations and “scientists” who state that “the debate is over.”

I won’t dip to your level here and speak of my lack of penile member, nor pretend that your opinion of my blog is average, nor hold my laughter in that you say I do no research. And I’m sure you’ll be back for my next post, with more feces to spew like a wild ape.

But I’ll allow no more of this, but will keep what shit you’ve flung for posterity and to show the mentality.

BMan

Maxx

“Flat Earth is all about the JEW World Order hiding the creator of all that IS and I do not mean Jesus because Jesus never existed. Oh, you still worship the invisible man huh! Sorry about your luck.”
You sound like a fucking jew. Prove Jesus didnt exist. That’s a typical JEW response, along with the insults and attacks. You are a jerk.

Maxx

mjday47362

https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/flat/flateart.htm
Flat Earth can be Argued Against by those who do not have the open consciousness and spiritually open eyes to see what is right there staring them in the face.
The Ball Earthers or Globe Earthers are perfect examples of Controlled Programming from Birth. Some will get it later on and some simply will not ever get it.

If I can stand on the shore and look at a body of land 12 to 20 miles out in the ocean, there is no curve on that water. Earth Curve charts say they should be way over the curve, yet there they are.
Why is it I can fly a small plane flat and level for 20 miles and never gain elevation from simply going over the curve of the earth? According to earth curve charts I should have gained 266 feet in altitude if I did not adjust my nose down to compensate for the earth curve. YET when a course is plotted to travel that 20 miles or more, there is no calculation for curvature. Why is that? Because there is no curvature. LOL

I wonder why NASA hasn’t figured out yet that all they need to get into space is to fly a plane straight out into space by simply avoiding the curvature. By all rights, the jet will certainly just keep going straight and flat and it will get into space soon enough….correct?
That is what ball earthers keep telling me. Yet NASA seems to love to build rockets to overcome “GRAVITY”. They fly jets all over the place. Why not just fly out into space just as easy?

There is also no curve in this glass of water I am currently drinking, nor in my dogs bowl, nor in the public swimming pool. Could that not mean that the water is flat but the earth is not, due to what we are not allowed to call by you a gravity effect or whatever physical effect you wish to say it is that is keeping that water at bay? Why does this mean the earth is flat, just because water sits flat? That is like a child or the lab monkey declaring that the square peg fits into the square hole even though it also fits in the round hole.

Yet again, you offer no proofs but childish observations with no support. And you do so in an insulting way with the arrogance that only a fool can possess.

Vicki

I never said a word for or against any notion regarding the earth, flat or otherwise. In fact, I don’t care what shape it is, as it has no bearing on me what so ever. I don’t think you actually read what I wrote. And to get upset over the fact I didn’t state anything for or against anything is silly.

mjday47362

Yes Vicki…the whole world knows now that you have zero opinion for against anything.
Have you ever considered running for CEO of the Corporation known as the United States of America? that is the primary position the CEO must take………….they can have no opinion on anything.
We know that you are a real Doll Vickie….especially now. Look up the definition of Doll if you will. It is stuffed headed idiot!
The very reason that you care nothing about most things that are important is why you are seen as a Doll!

And again, the typical insulting flat-earther response, showing or proving nothing while ad hominem attacking everyone and everything not in line with their religious quackery of the flat earth god.

And so what you are saying is that the democratic party and the republican party have the same opinions, and that the president therefore might as well have no party affiliation, and that the debates between Trump and Clinton were actually two people agreeing with each other?

And, by the way, it’s just the “United States” corporation. Not America.

Merbailey

wow. Clint, you hit a nerve laid purposely bare by talMUD $tream Media to divide, conquer and most importantly RULE! my comment makes 29 but there are only 2 votes..i read your article the first day and wondered if malcolm bowden would be remembered, sooner or later. that interview was The most ‘messed with’ connection of any you did whilst broadcasting on RBN. his condoning the healing effects of a breakdown with Great Spirit’s comforting help and our special place in the universe must drive the [[[controllers]]] mad. Madness is also displayed by those who have consumed without pause or spiritual discernment, these ‘tempting fruits’. Live view of earth from satellite, 22,000 miles to the southwest could be found up to only two years before this nauseating psy op was sprung. Round, Sacred Earth. My loving prayers continue without ceasing, for us all. ❤

Thanks Mer, and sorry about the troll. But I must keep up these comments to show the utter ridiculousness in this psychological craziness. No such thing as space… and yet basic physics states that water takes up plenty of space. LOL!

Marc Wasson

I do not know the real shape of our earth but I know for sure it’s not what they have taught us in our schools the past 100 years or more. Water is flat and always seeks it’t own level, that is why we call it sea level and it never curves around a ball and gravity is a myth. NASA or anyone else can not prove curvature nor will they even attempt too because they know that it’s not there. It is as simple as this, they can not prove their ball theory. Clint…you can get this I know just look into it more..really.

LOL!!! The principle that water always seeks its own level does not apply. This is for when water is purposefully made to be unleveled in the same general space (i.e. in a tube). Every thing you post here is ridiculous. And then you say that “water is always flat” which must mean that on a round globe water is always flat. LOL again!!!

At least this comment used the word “probably” unlike the certainty you claim with every fallacious, factitious detail.

Maxx

Water WILL curve up or down along the sides of a glass. Chelation is “binding” its the sharing of electrons with whatever elements it comes in contact with. Chelation is whats holds matter together. Its what holds the universe together. I skimmed over what Clint wrote because I knew where he was going and skipped right to the flat eath huggers idiotic replies. You think I havent done my research on flat earth. If you read my replies above, and I repeat, I researched FE for five days with serious consideration of two of my idiot flat earth friends, who treat me nice now, after five days I concluded short of a couple cunning myopic arguments, FE was inconclusive with no real provable evidence. And im being polite. That is smacked of another masonic hoax. A psyop to discredit the so called “truth movement “. I was going to do a show with Sinead McCarthy, smart woman, jew wise BUT once I started pointing out logical fallacies, she freaked out on me. I never in my life went from admiring someone to utterly despising someone, so fast. Renegade Broadcasting after doing some good research, went right down the flat earth toilet completely discrediting all the good honest work they were doing before. Honest Truth is self evident and obvious. You dont have to insult people into your position. FE fails all the way around. Ive done my homework. Sometimes Im alittle slow but I usually figure out he magic trick.

Maxx

Marc, the problem is you cannot prove your flat theory. There is nothing for me to get if there is no conclusive evidence either way. Thus, you are only attacking my declared stance of I DON’T KNOW! It is not I making any claims. I am only debunking the claims made. And any flat-earther that takes it seriously should thank me for exposing such a fraud as the subject of this post. But just because I don’t know doesn’t mean I must accept your theory, nor fall silent to the insults hurled at anyone that doesn’t fall on their knees and start praying to the flat earth strapped to a turtle idol and theory.

Marc Wasson

Clint, again just focus on the curve (or lack thereof) issue and forget about the rest for now. I did this over two years ago trying to debunk those ftatearthers ridiculous assumptions but could not. I discovered that all pictures from space that NASA shows us are all fake (CGI) so they could not hold up in court as real evidence. Boats going over the horizon and disappearing to the naked eye was debunked with a telescope. Earth is mostly water (70%) and water is level or as with rivers seeks level in a lake or ocean. Water does not curve. So, where can we see a curve? Nowhere. But we can see over 100 miles with our naked eyes on a clear day many islands that should be hidden below the curve. No detectable curvature no ball. Again and again show me the curve. I can’t prove the earth is flat but I can prove it’s not the ball we have been sold.

No, you can’t, and that’s the point. You have as many valid pictures, in your description, as NASA does. Apparently zero. You are speaking to me as if I am on some side, when I specifically stated the best answer is I don’t know. But all evidence points to the flat earth movement to be false and immaturely so on every front. Give me one, conclusive piece of evidence. Just one.

Marc Wasson

Clint, the proof is in proving by the scientific method viable curvature or flatness. You say show me the proof of a flat earth and I say show me the proof of a ball earth. There are hundreds of these demonstrable and documented videos to view that shows it’s flat. None showing a curve. You seem to avoid the obvious and remain willfully ignorant.

“An honest but mistaken man, once shown the truth, either ceases to be mistaken or ceases to be honest’.

In Love, Marc

On another topic. Can I purchase your book with silver? Reply with your address if I can.

Hey Marc. I covered this above, in the blog post, that if you are standing on a ball/globe, you would only see a flat horizon. It takes some imagination, of course, or rather conscious awareness about what it would actually look like from that vantage point. If you were to perceive a curve in front of you, then where would the curve go? If you then looked to the right or left you would see the curve continuing downward, and behind you there would be nothing to see. You are thinking two-dimensional instead of 3 dimensionally. This is self-evident, that wherever you would look would be the same hight all around the globe/ball. You would be no higher in perspective to any of those points on the horizon if you were east, west, north, or south of the edge of the visible horizon anywhere around you. Therefore there would be no perceptible curvature between those 2-dimentional (horizontal) directions either that you would see. There is simply nowhere for the curve to go.

The curvature would only be in your perspective when you could actually perceive the entity of the globe/ball from a higher vantage point, where you can see the earth as a 3 dimensional object. But the horizon is always 2 dimensional from our perspective. So this is just a logical fallacy, that you would actually be able to see the curve (if it is there).

But again, in ode’ to remaining neutral, this does not prove roundness or flatness, just what observational science would be. Both models would appear the same as to horizon from our low perspective.

I’d be happy to send you the free gift of a book, just follow the instructions on my website, just send your address to clint@strawmanstory.info and in the subject line write TO BE DELIVERED. If you’d like send a gift to help me keep writing future volumes, knowing all my work is free and not for sale, then my address is there as well.

–Thanks for being reasonable and un-insulting in your commentary and search for answers. Only a religion persecutes those opposed to their beliefs.

Maxx

Sphericity is the RULE and not the exception. You see all planets, sun and the moon, are round. But that doesnt prove they are spehres or Earth is a sphere. That is circumstantial evidence. Now you blow a soap bubble, and its mostly water chelating with soap particles some people add glycerine to make the bubbles larger and flexible. BUT the standard soap bubble will, almost always, %100 of the time be, perfectly round. Of all sizes. When was the last time you saw a flat soap bubble. Not once ever in your life did you see a flat soap bubble. Ever. Put one water droplet on a flat surface, and it will try to retain the “roundness” of the sphere. If you put talc on the surface, that keeps the water from want to bond with the flat surface. It will even more raised, and round. Water droplets in midair, with frame photography are almost always round, even in sequence of water droplets dropping in water. Spherical. The ONLY way the “Earth” could be flat is if there were an infinite plane, but you do not have to leave the atmosphere, to get photographs from model rockets to see that the Earth is quite, spherical. If the Earth is mostly water, it is going to move toward sphericity. A flat object, spinning or not in “space” is highly unstable and will not support life. It MUST be spherical, to spin and keep the Sun from completely frying the Earth. Why these things are ? You will have to ask God, but she will bitch slap you.

You gotta admit that this whole flat earth meme really is a master stroke. It’s distracted millions that could have actually attained a real awakening (for want of a better term) in the very real and obvious fact that the earth is without question, Flat.

Marj Darling

Clint, the Earth IS flat. Auguste Piccard was the first scientist to go up into the stratosphere, in an aluminum ball, in 1931. He went up 65 times and the August 1931 ‘Popular Science’ reported what he said about looking out the portal when he was in the stratosphere: “It appears a flat disk with upturned edges.” Watch the guy who bought that magazine issue here:

You always start your blogs by defining the damn legal profession’s terms. Extra terrestrial means extra land. There are other land masses that THEY don’t want us to know about. We are their cows, they steal energy from us, and they don’t want us coming to THEIR LAND…so they put globes in every school room. They took their word, ‘plane’, added a ‘t’ and came up with ‘planet’. WATCH IT! These are the ba$tard$ geoengineering us, poisoning us from the air, food, water, vaccines, drugs, cookware, soaps, ++++++++

The 747 cruises on some routes at 41,000 feet, close to 8 miles up, and no one has ever reported such a thing about the “appearance” of upturned edges. This “friend of Einstein” whom you all say is a fraud must be believed, right? No logical association fallacy on this one? And isn’t popular science one of the ones you also call as a shill hit-piece fake news or whatever magazine that tried to debunk the whole 9/11 truth movement?

A Hennessy Cognac commercial, I’m afraid, is not exactly a valid source, though I love that commercial. I remember such artistic expressions of imagination could be shown without it being automatically linked to some conspiracy. Now everything must point to something else.

By your logic here, I must therefore believe everyone who has witnessed aliens and flying saucers, and also Bigfoot and skin walkers. The list goes on…

He gave his perspective, as what things appeared to be, which is what the entire flat earth argument is both based on and ultimately fails upon. Appearances are not necessarily realities.

I still claim not to know, and am astounded that you insist that you know with such certainty based on this one claim. This is not scientific at all.

Are you referring to my book’s coverage and comparison of the Enuma Elish as the Babylonian creation story with the “Genesis” account of Creation, and how it is clear the Bible story shows the Old Testament people worshiping those same Babylonian gods, Marduk, etc? Would be happy to speak to you about it if you have insights I’m not seeing.

Shane

mahwah

…GUYS, GUYS!!! But there is finally “proof” after all! (I couldn’t resist and post thisi 7 min vid) “A blast from the past!” (Notice the name of the periodical “COOK” county herald) and now, for your enter tain ment(e) start at 1min 15 sec When Was Ball Earth established as SCIENCE FACT? https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=52&v=4OyqOUYkjgw

Maxx

Marc Wasson

Blessings to you too Mr. Maxx Man. It’s all about no curve no curve no ball. It’s all about no curve no curve no ball. It’s all about no curve no curve no ball. Great song. God (Jesus) Loves you…really. .

Maxx

Marc Wasson

Thank you so much Mr. Maxx Man. “Many will come in my Name but they are Antichrist and wolves. As for your suggestion, I’m not sure how someone would accomplish the act. Maybe you should demonstrate the procedure.

Maxx

You flat earth dopes are the biggest waste of everybodies time. You arent Christian, you are a fraud, probably another narcissist jew scumbag. Im just giving back what you assholes dish out to everybody.

bradSward

Wow… just look at the amount of divisive energy generated from one man simply offering his well formed opinion. A typical hallmark of psychological operations meant to polarize a large group. The is answer is out, not in.

It’s not so much your believing in your own correctness that is so disturbing, it is the arrogance and righteousness. You seem to just glaze over the word “figuratively,” which is the most important part of the definition.

Here are some other examples where the word breadth is used in its proper, figurative sense:

“You could watch entire villages and see what everyone was doing. I watched NSA tracking people’s Internet activities as they typed. I became aware of just how invasive U.S. surveillance capabilities had become. I realized the true breadth of this system. And almost nobody knew it was happening.” –Edward Snowden

So, was Snowden calling the internet surveillance of the government “flat” ??? Of course not. Wideness, impressiveness is implied, of course. Do you describe the mass of digital data as flat? No. It’s not even measurable in Natural terms, so breadth can’t even be used in this case as anything but figurative.

Is she saying that I love you flatly, or is this a figurative measure of width combined with height as a figurative measurement of her love? I love you flatly? LOL. Give me a break.

“Any man who can hitch the length and breadth of the galaxy, rough it, slum it, struggle against terrible odds, win through, and still knows where his towel is is clearly a man to be reckoned with.” –Douglas Adams

OMG! The galaxy must also be flat! Because surely he means to say here that space has length but is 2-dimensional, right? The galaxy has hight but no width (breadth) — yeah, that’s what he means for sure.

“Most men are within a finger’s breadth of being mad.” –Diogenes Mad

Here Diogenes surely refers to men as being close to flatness, right? Not the roundness of a finger or the width of one… Hmmm….

“You have been called to be who you are – the whole luminous light. No one can dim your light when you are fully present to the depth and breadth of it.” –Debbie Ford

Light must be flat too! Holy cow, we are really getting to the point here where everything we thought had depth in 3 dimensions is actually just flat! For surely in poetry, in verse, she must be being literal, right? And when comparing consciousness to light, of course the first thing that comes to mind is flatness! OMG! I didn’t see this before. Maybe I’ll become not a flat-earther, but a flat-everythinger!

“We must seek the loving-kindness of God in all the breadth and open-air of common life.” –George A. Smith

That’s right, we must seek loving-kindness in the “flatness” of common life. The air is flat too, of course, which is why he refers to its breadth.

I could go on, but I have learned that with the sophist, theosophic, vetetic mentality, there is no admission of wrongness and certainly no apologies or repentance.

Move on lady. The breadth of your bullshit stinks here. Go somewhere where such fecal matter is flat and without the stench of idiocracy.

If that’s all you get from the Bible, that the earth is flat, then you have completely, 100% missed the point of the story.

Marc Wasson

It is not a ball and this I know for sure. Show me the curvature? I and have many others proved that waters in the sea and lakes are flat..always. Clint you can know this but for some reason (pride and ego) you choose not to. Marc Wasson

Classic logical fallacy… you claim the earth is not round, therefore I must prove it by showing curvature. The burden of proof is on you. I never said the earth was anything but what it is. You say its flat. You prove its flat. So far, no evidence presented to me is incontrovertible. You say you have proof, so give it. Put it to scrutiny. Fact is you don’t have proof because you cannot. And that’s why this whole charade continues, because the debate is over knowledge only “God” may know, which is called theosophy, pretending divine wisdom. If this blogpost disappoints you, then the next one will really do it. You should understand the source of your religion before you proceed:

Marc Wasson

I did not say the earth is flat. I said that water is always flat and levels out into lakes and seas. Proof? Sea Level. There are literally thousands of videos out there that you seem to ignore that document the fact that this supposed curvature formula of 25,000 mile distance “around” this imaginary ball can not be demonstrated. This formula (8 inches per mile squared) is from the Nasa gang not from the flat earthers. Nasa can not prove rotundity and they largely rely on their fake images or cartoons (CGI) and years of indoctrination (brain washing) in our schools, universities and Hollywood DisneyLand programming to prolong this lie that we live on a ball. My religion you say must be sourced and understood by me before I proceed is just flat out ridiculous. Proving that there is no cure is not a religious matter or belief system, it is science, math and demonstrable facts. The burden of proof and the incontrovertible evidence works both ways. We have shown you ours but I haven’t seen yours yet. I understand your confusion and stubbornness, it’s hard and disappointing when someone takes your ball away. Show me the curvature, that’s all I ask.

If one asks “show me the curve,” then this can be taken no other way than what is the opposite of a curve, which is flat. So yes, you are implying the flatness when you seek the curve.

I’ll not participate in this ridiculousness. I’ve looked into it and found it to be fallacious, and left this and the above listed research as the evidence. Take it or leave it, but don’t pollute my comments with pointless requests when nothing will satisfy your inquiry. Ironically, your argument about flat earth is circular. LOL!

Most scientists tell us we are hurtling through space on an oblate spheroid spinning at approximately 1,040 mph at the equator (0 mph at the poles) on an elliptical orbit around a GV2 yellow dwarf star that is rotating at 514K mph around an arm of the Milky Way spiral galaxy (taking 230M years to orbit it), which has a supermassive black hole at its center, while said galaxy is allegedly barreling away from the origin of the Big Bang at an astonishing 1.3M mph — ripping space-time in its wake! Wow!!! And, these are the same “scientists” who tell us exactly how the core of our planet is comprised, yet the deepest borehole ever drilled (Kola Superdeep Borehole) is 7.62 miles… and (gasp!) they discovered the remnants of the “fountains of the deep” just as is described in the Bible. We have been indoctrinated since birth with our solar system mobiles on our cribs. #WakeUp #QuestionEverything